Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of disease severity on EQ-5D and SF-6D utility discrepancies in chronic heart failure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities across groups of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients with varying levels of disease severity.

Methods

A consecutive sample (N = 251) of CHF patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery were surveyed. Disease severity was proxied via a self-assessment scale, the EQ-VAS and the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI); however, validity was demonstrated only by the latter. Association and level of agreement between instruments in DASI-based severity groups were estimated with Pearson’s r and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. Paired-samples t test was used to identify significant differences. In a linear regression model, the DASI was used as an anchor of disease severity to identify a potential “crossover” point between EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities.

Results

EQ-5D and SF-6D strongly correlated over the entire sample (r = 0.647, P < 0.001); however, their agreement was moderate (ICC = 0.484, P < 0.001). In the less severe DASI groups (i.e. higher functional capacity) EQ-5D was significantly higher than SF-6D (P < 0.001) and differences constituted minimally important differences (MIDs). Contrarily, in the more severe groups SF-6D was predominantly higher than EQ-5D. The regression model indicated a utility crossover point at 0.722 and predicted that individuals with a utility score less than this would score higher on the SF-6D than on the EQ-5D, and vice versa. The DASI score at crossover was calculated at 31.94.

Conclusions

In subgroups of patients differing in CHF severity according to the DASI, mean EQ-5D and SF-6D indices differed significantly. Contrarily, in socio-demographic and clinical groups, these utility differences were not directly evident. According to the evidence, comparisons based on severity classification via a valid disease-specific external instrument may provide insight on instrument choice in cost-utility analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McMurray, J.J., Pfeffer, M.A.: Heart failure. Lancet 365, 1877–1889 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stewart, S., Jenkins, A., Buchan, S., McGuire, A., Capewell, S., McMurray, J.J.: The current cost of heart failure to the National Health Service in the UK. Eur. J. Heart Fail. 4, 361–371 (2002)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rosamond, W., Flegal, K., Furie, K., Go, A., Greenlund, K., Haase, N., et al.: Heart disease and stroke statistics-2008 update: a report from the American heart association statistics committee and stroke statistics subcommittee. Circulation 117, e25–e146 (2008)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rich, M.W., Nease, R.F.: Cost-effectiveness analysis in clinical practice: the case of heart failure. Arch. Intern. Med. 159, 1690–1700 (1999)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Juenger, J., Schellberg, D., Kraemer, S., Haunstetter, A., Zugck, C., Herzog, W., et al.: Health related quality of life in patients with congestive heart failure: comparison with other chronic diseases and relation to functional variables. Heart 87, 235–241 (2002)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hobbs, F.D., Kenkre, J.E., Roalfe, A.K., Davis, R.C., Hare, R., Davies, M.K.: Impact of heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction on quality of life: a cross-sectional study comparing common chronic cardiac and medical disorders and a representative adult population. Eur. Heart J. 23, 1867–1876 (2002)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Neubauer, S.: The failing heart—an engine out of fuel. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1140–1151 (2007)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Weintraub, W.S., Cole, J., Tooley, J.F.: Cost and cost-effectiveness studies in heart failure research. Am. Heart J. 143, 565–576 (2002)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rasanen, P., Roine, E., Sintonen, H., Semberg-Konttinen, V., Ryynanen, O.P., Roine, R.: Use of quality-adjusted life years for the estimation of effectiveness of health care: a systematic literature review. Int. J. Tech. Assess Health Care 22, 235–241 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bryan, S., Longworth, L.: Measuring health-related utility: why the disparity between EQ-5D and SF-6D? Eur. J. Health Econ. 6, 253–260 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bleichrodt, H.: A new explanation for the difference between time trade-off utilities and standard gamble utilities. Health Econ. 11, 447–456 (2002)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Green, C., Brazier, J., Deverill, M.: Valuing health-related quality of life. A review of health state valuation techniques. Pharmacoeconomics 17, 151–165 (2000)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., Williams, A.: Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. J. Health Econ. 15, 209–231 (1996)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Longworth, L., Bryan, S.: An empirical comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D in liver transplant patients. Health Econ. 12, 1061–1067 (2003)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gerard, K., Nicholson, T., Mullee, M., Mehta, R., Roderick, P.: EQ-5D versus SF-6D in an older, chronically ill patient group. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 3, 91–102 (2004)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lamers, L.M., Bouwmans, C.A., van Straten, A., Donker, M.C., Hakkaart, L.: Comparison of EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities in mental health patients. Health Econ. 15, 1229–1236 (2006)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Xie, F., Li, S.C., Luo, N., Lo, N.N., Yeo, S.J., Yang, K.Y., et al.: Comparison of the EuroQol and short form 6D in Singapore multiethnic Asian knee osteoarthritis patients scheduled for total knee replacement. Arthritis Rheum. 57, 1043–1049 (2007)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. van Stel, H.F., Buskens, E.: Comparison of the SF-6D and the EQ-5D in patients with coronary heart disease. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 4, 20 (2006)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grieve, R., Grishchenko, M., Cairns, J.: SF-6D versus EQ-5D: reasons for differences in utility scores and impact on reported cost-utility. Eur. J. Health Econ. 10, 15–23 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., Busschbach, J.: A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Econ. 13, 873–884 (2004)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kontodimopoulos, N., Pappa, E., Papadopoulos, A.A., Tountas, Y., Niakas, D.: Comparing SF-6D and EQ-5D utilities across groups differing in health status. Qual. Life Res. 18, 87–97 (2009)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Barton, G.R., Sach, T.H., Avery, A.J., Doherty, M., Jenkinson, C., Muir, K.R.: Comparing the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D when measuring the benefits of alleviating knee pain. Cost Eff. Resour. Alloc. 7, 12 (2009)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Petrou, S., Hockley, C.: An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ-5D and SF-6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population. Health Econ. 14, 1169–1189 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bharmal, M., Thomas 3rd, J.: Comparing the EQ-5D and the SF-6D descriptive systems to assess their ceiling effects in the US general population. Value Health 9, 262–271 (2006)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Barton, G.R., Sach, T.H., Avery, A.J., Jenkinson, C., Doherty, M., Whynes, D.K., et al.: A comparison of the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D for individuals aged > or = 45 years. Health Econ. 17, 815–832 (2008)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Tsevat, J., Duke, D., Goldman, L., Pfeffer, M.A., Lamas, G.A., Soukup, J.R., et al.: Cost-effectiveness of captopril therapy after myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 26, 914–919 (1995)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Glick, H., Cook, J., Kinosian, B., Pitt, B., Bourassa, M.G., Pouleur, H., et al.: Costs and effects of enalapril therapy in patients with symptomatic heart failure: an economic analysis of the studies of left ventricular dysfunction (SOLVD) treatment trial. J. Card. Fail. 1, 371–380 (1995)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. NICE, London (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  29. The EuroQol group: EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health related quality of life. Health Policy 16, 199–208 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Brooks, R.: EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37, 53–72 (1996)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Dolan, P.: Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med. Care 35, 1095–1108 (1997)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Dolan, P., Gudex, C., Kind, P., Williams, A.: The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 5, 141–154 (1996)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Yfantopoulos, J.: The Greek version of the EuroQol (EQ-5D) instrument. Arch. Hell. Med. 18, 180–191 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kontodimopoulos, N., Pappa, E., Niakas, D., Yfantopoulos, J., Dimitrakaki, C., Tountas, Y.: Validity of the EQ-5D instrument in a Greek general population. Value Health 11, 1162–1169 (2008)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21, 271–292 (2002)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pappa, E., Kontodimopoulos, N., Niakas, D.: Validating and norming of the Greek SF-36 health survey. Qual. Life Res. 14, 1433–1438 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Anagnostopoulos, F., Niakas, D., Pappa, E.: Construct validation of the Greek SF-36 health survey. Qual. Life Res. 14, 1959–1965 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kontodimopoulos, N., Niakas, D.: A cost-utility analysis in renal replacement therapy based on patients’ expected remaining life years. Health Policy 86, 85–96 (2008)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hlatky, M.A., Boineau, R.E., Higginbotham, M.B., Lee, K.L., Mark, D.B., Califf, R.M., et al.: A brief self-administered questionnaire to determine functional capacity (The Duke activity status index). Am. J. Cardiol. 64, 651–654 (1989)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Mark, D.B., Naylor, C.D., Hlatky, M.A., Califf, R.M., Topol, E.J., Granger, C.B., et al.: Use of medical resources and quality of life after myocardial infarction in Canada and the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 331, 1130–1135 (1994)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Pilote, L., Bourassa, M.G., Bacon, C., Bost, J., Detre, K., Mark, D.B., et al.: Better functional status in American than Canadian patients with heart disease: an effect of medical care? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 26, 1115–1120 (1995)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Roques, F., Nashef, S.A., Michel, P., Gauducheau, E., de Vincentiis, C., Baudet, E., et al.: Risk factors and outcome in European cardiac surgery: analysis of the Euro-SCORE multinational database of 19 030 patients. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 15, 816–822 (1999)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Nashef, S.A., Roques, F., Michel, P., Gauducheau, E., Lemeshow, S., Salamon, R.: European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (Euro-SCORE). Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 16, 9–13 (1999)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Cohen, J.: A power primer. Psychol. Bull. 112, 155–159 (1992)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Walters, S.J., Brazier, J.E.: What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 1, 4 (2003)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sullivan, P.W., Lawrence, W.F., Ghushchyan, V.: A national catalog of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med. Care 43, 736–749 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Walters, S.J., Brazier, J.E.: Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual. Life Res. 14, 1523–1532 (2005)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Nelson, C.L., Herndon, J.E., Mark, D.B., Pryor, D.B., Califf, R.M., Hlatky, M.A.: Relation of clinical and angiographic factors to functional capacity as measured by the Duke activity status index. Am. J. Cardiol. 68, 973–975 (1991)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Parissis, J.T., Nikolaou, M., Birmpa, D., Farmakis, D., Paraskevaidis, I., Bistola, V., et al.: Clinical and prognostic value of Duke’s activity status index along with plasma B-type natriuretic peptide levels in chronic heart failure secondary to ischemic or idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Am. J. Cardiol. 103, 73–75 (2009)

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, Hellenic Open University, Bouboulinas 57, 26222, Patras, Greece

    Nick Kontodimopoulos, Michalis Argiriou & Dimitris Niakas

  2. 2nd Department of Cardiac Surgery, Evangelismos Hospital, Athens, Greece

    Michalis Argiriou & Nikolaos Theakos

Authors
  1. Nick Kontodimopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michalis Argiriou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nikolaos Theakos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dimitris Niakas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nick Kontodimopoulos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kontodimopoulos, N., Argiriou, M., Theakos, N. et al. The impact of disease severity on EQ-5D and SF-6D utility discrepancies in chronic heart failure. Eur J Health Econ 12, 383–391 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-010-0252-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-010-0252-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation